Revdex.com of RI [redacted] Re: complaint # [redacted] The customer, after running aground, ran his 23’ boat under its own power to us in late September of We hauled the boat for repairsThe shaft and prop were very bentUpon installing a shaft supplied by the customer we noticed that alignment was offWe also noticed that the boat changed shape with movement of supporting boat stands and blockingIn addition, we noticed a transmission oil leak and we topped off the transmission oilOften rough alignment can be achieved on land, with final alignment ***e in the waterIn this case, we ultimately decided to perform the entire alignment in water after allowing the boat to set for a weekUpon completion, we seatrialed the boat with success on Dec 2,2013, no shaft movement, no vibrationWe did have trouble with the engine idle and back firing at top rpm, and informed the owner that he needed to address thatWe also noted to the owner that his transmission had leaked out oil and we had topped it offAll these items were noted on our bill to the customer.We installed new hose clamps on the exhaust hose to stop a water leak, the existing clamps would not tighten down enoughWe cleaned up contacts in the cap and rotor and repaired the fuel filter system which was rotted and broke apartThis was in attempt to get the engine to run sufficiently well to test run our alignment workThis work was completed on December 2,2013.The owner came in late December to take his boatHe test ran it and then had us haul it and place it on his trailerThis was at the end of DecemberHe commented to us at that time that the engine was running rough, we told him he needed at a minimum a tune upHe said nothing about an alignment problem then.After months, the customer contacted us and stated that the alignment was way off and he wanted his money backI informed him that if there was some problem with our workmanship, we wouldtake care of itI told him to bring the boat back here for us to look at itHe refusedThis communication is on email.We do not know what the customer has ***e to the boat in the last yearBut even if it has only sat on the trailer as he states, the alignment cannot be properly ***eI told the owner that the boat needed to be in the water as the [redacted] standard #states and as we found last year specifically with this boatThis was our reasoning to have the boat brought backThe owner is still insisting to go through the alignment with the boat on a trailer.Other issues the customer mentioned: cutlass bearing- we replaced as was and the length of that bearing is proper for that diameter shaft.Transmission seal leakingIt was already leaking when we were installing the shaftIt was most likely damaged when the owner ran the boat to us after hitting the rocksWe informed him of that also.Bent shaftThis has not even been determined, the customer has asked for money again to have the shaft checkedIf it is bent, how did it happen? I feel my offer to repair any problems related to our work is fairI was not given the opportunity to look at the problemThe owner now states he has re***e all the work plus some other improvements on the boatThe pictures he has taken of the alignment problem only reinforce my argument that the boat needs to be floating to get proper alignmentWe had the same issue with the transmission coupling being high while on the land, and needed to lower the back of the engine after launchingThis information was also stated on our bill.Respectfully, [redacted] (GM)Point [redacted]
Revdex.com of RI[redacted]Re: complaint #[redacted]The customer, after running aground, ran his 23’ boat under its own power to us in late September of 2013. We hauled the boat for repairs. The shaft and prop were very bent. Upon installing a shaft...
supplied by the customer we noticed that alignment was off. We also noticed that the boat changed shape with movement of supporting boat stands and blocking. In addition, we noticed a transmission oil leak and we topped off the transmission oil. Often rough alignment can be achieved on land, with final alignment [redacted]e in the water. In this case, we ultimately decided to perform the entire alignment in water after allowing the boat to set for a week. Upon completion, we seatrialed the boat with success on Dec 2,2013, no shaft movement, no vibration. We did have trouble with the engine idle and back firing at top rpm, and informed the owner that he needed to address that. We also noted to the owner that his transmission had leaked out oil and we had topped it off. All these items were noted on our bill to the customer.We installed new hose clamps on the exhaust hose to stop a water leak, the existing clamps would not tighten down enough. We cleaned up contacts in the cap and rotor and repaired the fuel filter system which was rotted and broke apart. This was in attempt to get the engine to run sufficiently well to test run our alignment work. This work was completed on December 2,2013.The owner came in late December to take his boat. He test ran it and then had us haul it and place it on his trailer. This was at the end of December. He commented to us at that time that the engine was running rough, we told him he needed at a minimum a tune up. He said nothing about an alignment problem then.After 9 months, the customer contacted us and stated that the alignment was way off and he wanted his money back. I informed him that if there was some problem with our workmanship, we wouldtake care of it. I told him to bring the boat back here for us to look at it. He refused. This communication is on email.We do not know what the customer has [redacted]e to the boat in the last year. But even if it has only sat on the trailer as he states, the alignment cannot be properly [redacted]e. I told the owner that the boat needed to be in the water as the[redacted] standard #6.5.5.3.1 states and as we found last year specifically with this boat. This was our reasoning to have the boat brought back. The owner is still insisting to go through the alignment with the boat on a trailer.Other issues the customer mentioned: cutlass bearing- we replaced as was and the length of that bearing is proper for that diameter shaft.Transmission seal leaking. It was already leaking when we were installing the shaft. It was most likely damaged when the owner ran the boat to us after hitting the rocks. We informed him of that also.Bent shaft. This has not even been determined, the customer has asked for money again to have the shaft checked. If it is bent, how did it happen? I feel my offer to repair any problems related to our work is fair. I was not given the opportunity to look at the problem. The owner now states he has re[redacted]e all the work plus some other improvements on the boat. The pictures he has taken of the alignment problem only reinforce my argument that the boat needs to be floating to get proper alignment. We had the same issue with the transmission coupling being high while on the land, and needed to lower the back of the engine after launching. This information was also stated on our bill.Respectfully,[redacted](GM)Point [redacted]
Revdex.com:
I have reviewed the response submitted by the business and have determined that the response does not satisfy or resolve my issues and/or concerns in reference to complaint # [redacted]. As PJM claims, “the boat changed shape” because it was not supported correctly. I have aligned the engine to shaft numerous times over the many years of my owning the boat-never have I had the difficulties that PJM experienced. PJM never laid a wrench on the front mounting adjustment fasteners. I’d like a competent person to explain how it is possible to properly align an engine to a shaft without making fine adjustments to ALL adjusting screws. It is not possible! That is why I received boat with engine in a state of mis-alignment with shaft. At the service counter at PJM’s facility while boat was still under repair, I drew a diagram on paper in front of PJM owner and other staff on the day that I had traveled to their site for purpose to measure prop shaft so that they could be confident of its dimension (inch or mm). That diagram is a sectional view of the strut, shaft, and cutlass bearing. As I was drawing in front PJM owner, owner stated “The engine is too high.” PJM service manager was witness to this exclamation. Yes, the engine was too high. It remained to be too high upon delivery to me. The shims that PJM placed under engine mounts, instead of properly adjusting mount, caused engine to be too high. [redacted] guidelines state, from par. 6.5.5.3, Bearings, shaft, and couplings shall be aligned to a tolerance of no more than .004 in. (.102 mm) measured between the parallel flange of the coupling with the coupling bolts loose. There is no evidence of PJM performing the engine alignment according to [redacted] standards. Quite to the contrary, the existence of the shims, lack of making any adjustments to front mounts, rough running of engine, perceived low transmission fluid, and pictures that I took upon this discovery are clear indicators that engine was not aligned to any standard that would be remotely acceptable in the marine industry.
This extreme height of engine also caused PJM’s perceived diagnosis of my engine needing of a tune-up. The rough performance of the engine was not present the day I ran aground. Additionally, I had made a very successful run from [redacted] to Point Judith, about 60 miles just days before grounding. The engine ran perfect then, and continued to run perfect, even after running aground. Rough running was caused by PJM, from extreme engine angle. On the carbureted V8 [redacted] engine, the front 2 cylinders #’s 1 and 2 were starved of fuel because fuel was unable to climb steep angle in intake manifold and reach combustion chambers. Secondly, the final 2 cylinders #’s 7 and 8 became flooded of excess fuel from extreme angle of engine. This caused back firing of #’s 7 and 8, and lack of power produced from #’s 1 and 2.
There was no corrosion present in, near, or anyway associated with any part of ignition system of the engine. I maintain extreme care of my engine and any statement to the contrary is completely untrue. My comments to PJM when presented with rough running condition was to think that a spark plug wire was off or plug broken when reinstalling manifolds during alignment process. However, since alignment was not properly performed (the only way to gain proper access to front mounts, as I explained to PJM early in process, is to remove exhaust manifolds) manifolds were never removed, so spark plugs and wires were not at fault, the engine height was at fault for this situation caused by PJM.
As for getting boat to PJM, that is an unreasonable request. When a repair facility cannot determine the diameter of a shaft or figure out proper clearances in a bearing (ref. email 10/06/2013), or install the correct length bearing (Ref. [redacted] par. 6.9.1, “6.9.1 The length of the strut barrel or boss, which is also the length of the bearing…”), and leave critical fasteners on boat loose (stuffing box locknut, engine mounting bolt, Racor bracket) their lack of knowledge and integrity in this field is fully demonstrated. How can one have continued confidence when workmanship such as described was delivered?
There is no notice of leaking transmission. There is no evidence of transmission oil in bilge. The first I am hearing of this is through PJM’s response to my complaint. Invoices state nothing about leaking transmission. My belief is that because PJM shimmed engine so high in front, extreme angle of transmission caused fluid to flow to rear of gear-case, resulting in low fluid on dipstick. All fluids were at correct quantity before running boat from CT to RI.
[redacted] C.E.A.
Principal Engineer, Mechanical
Regards,
[redacted]
Revdex.com of RI [redacted] Re: complaint # [redacted] The customer, after running aground, ran his 23’ boat under its own power to us in late September of We hauled the boat for repairsThe shaft and prop were very bentUpon installing a shaft supplied by the customer we noticed that alignment was offWe also noticed that the boat changed shape with movement of supporting boat stands and blockingIn addition, we noticed a transmission oil leak and we topped off the transmission oilOften rough alignment can be achieved on land, with final alignment ***e in the waterIn this case, we ultimately decided to perform the entire alignment in water after allowing the boat to set for a weekUpon completion, we seatrialed the boat with success on Dec 2,2013, no shaft movement, no vibrationWe did have trouble with the engine idle and back firing at top rpm, and informed the owner that he needed to address thatWe also noted to the owner that his transmission had leaked out oil and we had topped it offAll these items were noted on our bill to the customer.We installed new hose clamps on the exhaust hose to stop a water leak, the existing clamps would not tighten down enoughWe cleaned up contacts in the cap and rotor and repaired the fuel filter system which was rotted and broke apartThis was in attempt to get the engine to run sufficiently well to test run our alignment workThis work was completed on December 2,2013.The owner came in late December to take his boatHe test ran it and then had us haul it and place it on his trailerThis was at the end of DecemberHe commented to us at that time that the engine was running rough, we told him he needed at a minimum a tune upHe said nothing about an alignment problem then.After months, the customer contacted us and stated that the alignment was way off and he wanted his money backI informed him that if there was some problem with our workmanship, we wouldtake care of itI told him to bring the boat back here for us to look at itHe refusedThis communication is on email.We do not know what the customer has ***e to the boat in the last yearBut even if it has only sat on the trailer as he states, the alignment cannot be properly ***eI told the owner that the boat needed to be in the water as the [redacted] standard #states and as we found last year specifically with this boatThis was our reasoning to have the boat brought backThe owner is still insisting to go through the alignment with the boat on a trailer.Other issues the customer mentioned: cutlass bearing- we replaced as was and the length of that bearing is proper for that diameter shaft.Transmission seal leakingIt was already leaking when we were installing the shaftIt was most likely damaged when the owner ran the boat to us after hitting the rocksWe informed him of that also.Bent shaftThis has not even been determined, the customer has asked for money again to have the shaft checkedIf it is bent, how did it happen? I feel my offer to repair any problems related to our work is fairI was not given the opportunity to look at the problemThe owner now states he has re***e all the work plus some other improvements on the boatThe pictures he has taken of the alignment problem only reinforce my argument that the boat needs to be floating to get proper alignmentWe had the same issue with the transmission coupling being high while on the land, and needed to lower the back of the engine after launchingThis information was also stated on our bill.Respectfully, [redacted] (GM)Point [redacted]
Revdex.com of RI[redacted]Re: complaint #[redacted]The customer, after running aground, ran his 23’ boat under its own power to us in late September of 2013. We hauled the boat for repairs. The shaft and prop were very bent. Upon installing a shaft...
supplied by the customer we noticed that alignment was off. We also noticed that the boat changed shape with movement of supporting boat stands and blocking. In addition, we noticed a transmission oil leak and we topped off the transmission oil. Often rough alignment can be achieved on land, with final alignment [redacted]e in the water. In this case, we ultimately decided to perform the entire alignment in water after allowing the boat to set for a week. Upon completion, we seatrialed the boat with success on Dec 2,2013, no shaft movement, no vibration. We did have trouble with the engine idle and back firing at top rpm, and informed the owner that he needed to address that. We also noted to the owner that his transmission had leaked out oil and we had topped it off. All these items were noted on our bill to the customer.We installed new hose clamps on the exhaust hose to stop a water leak, the existing clamps would not tighten down enough. We cleaned up contacts in the cap and rotor and repaired the fuel filter system which was rotted and broke apart. This was in attempt to get the engine to run sufficiently well to test run our alignment work. This work was completed on December 2,2013.The owner came in late December to take his boat. He test ran it and then had us haul it and place it on his trailer. This was at the end of December. He commented to us at that time that the engine was running rough, we told him he needed at a minimum a tune up. He said nothing about an alignment problem then.After 9 months, the customer contacted us and stated that the alignment was way off and he wanted his money back. I informed him that if there was some problem with our workmanship, we wouldtake care of it. I told him to bring the boat back here for us to look at it. He refused. This communication is on email.We do not know what the customer has [redacted]e to the boat in the last year. But even if it has only sat on the trailer as he states, the alignment cannot be properly [redacted]e. I told the owner that the boat needed to be in the water as the[redacted] standard #6.5.5.3.1 states and as we found last year specifically with this boat. This was our reasoning to have the boat brought back. The owner is still insisting to go through the alignment with the boat on a trailer.Other issues the customer mentioned: cutlass bearing- we replaced as was and the length of that bearing is proper for that diameter shaft.Transmission seal leaking. It was already leaking when we were installing the shaft. It was most likely damaged when the owner ran the boat to us after hitting the rocks. We informed him of that also.Bent shaft. This has not even been determined, the customer has asked for money again to have the shaft checked. If it is bent, how did it happen? I feel my offer to repair any problems related to our work is fair. I was not given the opportunity to look at the problem. The owner now states he has re[redacted]e all the work plus some other improvements on the boat. The pictures he has taken of the alignment problem only reinforce my argument that the boat needs to be floating to get proper alignment. We had the same issue with the transmission coupling being high while on the land, and needed to lower the back of the engine after launching. This information was also stated on our bill.Respectfully,[redacted](GM)Point [redacted]
Revdex.com:
I have reviewed the response submitted by the business and have determined that the response does not satisfy or resolve my issues and/or concerns in reference to complaint # [redacted]. As PJM claims, “the boat changed shape” because it was not supported correctly. I have aligned the engine to shaft numerous times over the many years of my owning the boat-never have I had the difficulties that PJM experienced. PJM never laid a wrench on the front mounting adjustment fasteners. I’d like a competent person to explain how it is possible to properly align an engine to a shaft without making fine adjustments to ALL adjusting screws. It is not possible! That is why I received boat with engine in a state of mis-alignment with shaft. At the service counter at PJM’s facility while boat was still under repair, I drew a diagram on paper in front of PJM owner and other staff on the day that I had traveled to their site for purpose to measure prop shaft so that they could be confident of its dimension (inch or mm). That diagram is a sectional view of the strut, shaft, and cutlass bearing. As I was drawing in front PJM owner, owner stated “The engine is too high.” PJM service manager was witness to this exclamation. Yes, the engine was too high. It remained to be too high upon delivery to me. The shims that PJM placed under engine mounts, instead of properly adjusting mount, caused engine to be too high. [redacted] guidelines state, from par. 6.5.5.3, Bearings, shaft, and couplings shall be aligned to a tolerance of no more than .004 in. (.102 mm) measured between the parallel flange of the coupling with the coupling bolts loose. There is no evidence of PJM performing the engine alignment according to [redacted] standards. Quite to the contrary, the existence of the shims, lack of making any adjustments to front mounts, rough running of engine, perceived low transmission fluid, and pictures that I took upon this discovery are clear indicators that engine was not aligned to any standard that would be remotely acceptable in the marine industry.
This extreme height of engine also caused PJM’s perceived diagnosis of my engine needing of a tune-up. The rough performance of the engine was not present the day I ran aground. Additionally, I had made a very successful run from [redacted] to Point Judith, about 60 miles just days before grounding. The engine ran perfect then, and continued to run perfect, even after running aground. Rough running was caused by PJM, from extreme engine angle. On the carbureted V8 [redacted] engine, the front 2 cylinders #’s 1 and 2 were starved of fuel because fuel was unable to climb steep angle in intake manifold and reach combustion chambers. Secondly, the final 2 cylinders #’s 7 and 8 became flooded of excess fuel from extreme angle of engine. This caused back firing of #’s 7 and 8, and lack of power produced from #’s 1 and 2.
There was no corrosion present in, near, or anyway associated with any part of ignition system of the engine. I maintain extreme care of my engine and any statement to the contrary is completely untrue. My comments to PJM when presented with rough running condition was to think that a spark plug wire was off or plug broken when reinstalling manifolds during alignment process. However, since alignment was not properly performed (the only way to gain proper access to front mounts, as I explained to PJM early in process, is to remove exhaust manifolds) manifolds were never removed, so spark plugs and wires were not at fault, the engine height was at fault for this situation caused by PJM.
As for getting boat to PJM, that is an unreasonable request. When a repair facility cannot determine the diameter of a shaft or figure out proper clearances in a bearing (ref. email 10/06/2013), or install the correct length bearing (Ref. [redacted] par. 6.9.1, “6.9.1 The length of the strut barrel or boss, which is also the length of the bearing…”), and leave critical fasteners on boat loose (stuffing box locknut, engine mounting bolt, Racor bracket) their lack of knowledge and integrity in this field is fully demonstrated. How can one have continued confidence when workmanship such as described was delivered?
There is no notice of leaking transmission. There is no evidence of transmission oil in bilge. The first I am hearing of this is through PJM’s response to my complaint. Invoices state nothing about leaking transmission. My belief is that because PJM shimmed engine so high in front, extreme angle of transmission caused fluid to flow to rear of gear-case, resulting in low fluid on dipstick. All fluids were at correct quantity before running boat from CT to RI.
[redacted] C.E.A.
Principal Engineer, Mechanical
Regards,
[redacted]